Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The study of leadership dates back to the earliest records of human endeavour – the Iliad and the stories of Gilgamesh are in large part leadership fables. Early studies of leadership focused on the traits of great leaders, or sometimes the tactics of great leaders. This was extended in the 20th century to include leadership behaviours as well as situational contingencies. Unfortunately, all this approaches have failed to produce successful theories of leadership. Dr. Hurwitz discusses leadership theory.
Citation preview
Leadership: It’s Pre0y Simple… By Itself
Marc Hurwitz School of Business & Economics
Wilfrid Laurier University [email protected] or [email protected]
Arc of Today’s Story MoKvaKon for something ‘new’ in leadership
What is leadership?
A very brief, and mostly true history of leadership studies
Hidden assumpKons
Of fish and complexity
Beyond complexity to ?!
Leadership: How Are We Doing?
• CEO tenure at Fortune 500 companies
• Steady downwards trend
7.7 years • 1998
5.8 years • 2005
4.6 years • 2011
Leadership: How Are We Doing?
• Failure rate of leaders at 50-75% • Executive derailment ~ 50% • The overall global average employee engagement score is 56% in 2010 – Companies with low engagement (45% or less) had a total shareholder
return that was 28% lower than the average.
• Prevalence of destruc(ve leadership 33.5%-‐61% – Note: construcKve leadership is defined as good for the organizaKon AND good for subordinates
Aasland, M. S., Skogstad, A., Notelaers, G., et. al. (2010). The prevalence of destrucKve leadership behaviour.BJOM, 21: 438-‐452. Hogan, R. and Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership: a view of the dark side. InternaKonal Journal of EvaluaKon and Assessment, 9: 40-‐51. Hogan, J., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2010). Management derailment. In S. Zedeck (Ed.) American Psychological AssociaKon Handbook of Industrial and OrganizaKonal Psychology, Vol. 3 (pp. 555-‐575). Washington, DC: American Psychological AssociaKon. Sanborn, P., Malhotra, R., Atchson, A. (2010). Trends in global employee engagement. Aon ConsulKng.
Leadership: How Are We Doing?
• Happy workers are 12% more producKve • Unhappy workers are 10% less producKve • There has been a consistent decline in happiness at work since 1984 to today.
Green, F., and Tsitsianis, N. (2005). An invesKgaKon of naKonal trends in job saKsfacKon in Britain and Germany. BriKsh Journal of Industrial RelaKons, 43: 401-‐429. Oswald, A. J. (2010). EmoKonal prosperity and the SKglitz Commission. Jamie Doward (2010). Happy people really do work harder. The Observer (online).
Leadership: How Are We Doing?
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
29.00%
53.00%
18.00%
Project ComplePon Rate
Success Scope, on-‐Kme,
on-‐budget
Challenged Failed in some
aspect
Failed Abandoned
CHAOS ExecuKve Report, Standish Group (2004). Similar outcomes has been reported by Gartner Group.
The Cheeky Conclusion
Number of refereed arKcles on leadership
Current state of leadership in the world
1980s 2013
Leadership & Leaders
What is Leadership? Leadership is… “the process of influencing the acKviKes of an organized group in its efforts toward goal sepng and goal achievement.” – Stogdill, 1950.
“the individual in the group given the task of direcKng and coordinaKng task-‐relevant group acKviKes.” – Fiedler, 1967 (about leaders).
“the influenKal increment over and above mechanical compliance with rouKng direcKves of the organizaKon.” – Katz & Kahn, 1978.
“about arKculaKng visions, embodying values, and creaKng the environment within which things can be accomplished.” – Richards & Engle, 1986.
“the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it, and the process of facilitaKng individual and collecKve efforts to accomplish shared objecKves.” – Yukl, 2009.
Leadership & Leaders
“Of all the hazy and confounding areas in social psychology, leadership theory undoubtedly contends for nominaKon. And ironically, probably more has been wri0en and less is known about leadership than about any other topic in the behavioural sciences.”
-‐ Warren Bennis, 1959
The Great Man Theory
The Great Man
Followers Society
Output Thomas Carlyle, 1841 “The history of the world is but the biographies of great men.”
The Great Man Dethroned
Society
Followers
Leader
Output
Herbert Spencer, 1860, ‘Great men’ are a product of society
Great Men Back in the Saddle: Traits & Skills
Followers
Output
Traits dominated the early 20th century. Katz publishes in HBR (1955) “Skills of an EffecKve Administrator”
Leader traits & skills
Traits, Skills & Behaviours
Leader behaviours Followers
Output
Leader traits & skills
From a leader-‐focus to a leadership-‐focus.
E.g., Mintzberg’s influenKal 1973 book, “The Nature of Managerial Work” -‐ Interpersonal role -‐ InformaKonal role -‐ Decision roles
ConKngency Leadership
Leader behaviours Followers
Output
SituaKonal Variables
Leader traits & skills
Influence Theories of Leadership
Leader behaviours Followers
Output
SituaKonal Variables
Leader traits & skills
Influence processes
Based on Yukl, G., Leadership in OrganizaKons, 8th ed., 2013. p. 11
One Final AddiKon -‐ Levels
OrganizaKonal
Team
Dyad
Individual
Boundary Layers
With these levels, situaKonal variables, intra-‐ and interpersonal variables, leadership is complicated. But sKll not complex.
What’s My Problem With This?
• Leadership is a hammer, everything else a nail – Inappropriate ascripKon of cause. Needlessly complicates models, much like ‘epicycles’
– Much of what is discussed and measured is not leadership specific, i.e., traits, behaviours, influence processes
– Ignores mulKple roles/acKons, especially followership – Distorts our view of followership; f-‐word in biz & research
• Parent-‐child model of interacKons • Theories are descripKve or prescripKve, not explanatory
Hidden AssumpKons
1. ‘Leader’ and ‘leadership’ are strongly coupled conceptually and pracKcally
2. There is a useful disKncKon between leader and follower; they are independent constructs
3. The influence process does not involve significant feedback
4. Steady-‐state, equilibrium, Kme-‐independence, and linearity (mostly)
And Now, SKckleback Fish…
Next few slides based on research presented in: Harcourt, J.L., Tzo, A.Z., Sweetman, G., Johnstone, R.A, and Manica, A. (2009). Social feedback and the emergence of leaders and followers. Current Biology, 19, pp. 248-‐52.
Leaving Cover to Look for Food
Under cover In open Going first is an act of ‘leadership’
Experimental Results
Individually
Bold fish – 48.1 trips – 41.3% in open
Shy fish – 17.3 trips – 14.3% in open
Paired
Bold fish – 64.3 trips – 50.8% in open
Shy fish – 43.6 trips – 33.0% in open
Mutual influence process.
What does it mean to be the leader? the follower?
ConKnuous Time MCMC Model
Harcourt, J.L., Tzo, A.Z., Sweetman, G., Johnstone, R.A, and Manica, A. (2009). Social feedback and the emergence of leaders and followers. Current Biology, 19, p. 249.
Leadership Not Leaders • Leadership is any ac(on that we regard as such
– For example, leaving cover is an act of leadership. – Or is it? Is a ‘scout’ acKng on orders a leader? – Staying out when the other fish returns could be an act of leadership. Or is returning to cover the act of leadership?
• Note, however, that there is also followership and it affects the behaviour of the pair
• Both fish exert influence. – Influence is more than just an acKon – It is difficult to say that one has more influence than the other. You can’t say that leadership implies leader as other than a descripKon of a momentary state rather than a general rule.
Main ProposiKons
Prop 1: Leadership is NOT a role of the actors
Prop 2: Leadership refers to observable behaviours
Prop 3: (Leadership à Leader) in limiKng cases only
Prop 4: Linear models don’t capture the relaKonship between dyads (and likely not in general)
Prop 5: We need models that are more than descripKve; they also explain
The ‘Hidden’ AssumpKons
1. Leader and leadership are strongly coupled conceptually and pracKcally
2. There is a clear disKncKon between leader and follower; they are independent constructs
3. The influence process does not include feedback
4. Steady-‐state, equilibrium, Kme-‐independence, and linearity (mostly)
Complexity Leadership
Leadership emerges from the dynamic relationship and interactions between organizational actors.
Mary Parker Folle0, CreaKve Experience, 1924
Alternate Leadership DefiniKons 1. Leaders are part of a complex system.
“Those aspects of agent interac(ons that change the “local rules” governing the future interac(ons among agents.” – Hazy, Goldstein, Lichtenstein, 2007
2. “Leaders do not create the system, they are created by it, through a process of aggrega(on and emergence.” Marion & Uhl-‐Bien, 2003
3. “Leadership (is) an emergent behavioral phenomenon that results from the rela(onship interac(on of agents in the system.” – Jennings & Dooley, 2007 (& others)
4. Leadership is a social myth – Gemmill & Oakley, 1992
Complexity Models • Non-‐linear dynamical systems
– E.g., swallowtail a0ractor to describe team dynamics. Guastello & Bond, 2007
– Team leadership; mulKteam leadership
• Game theory; leader as first mover. Hubler & Pines, 1994 • Network models
– NK models; performance landscape made up of N nodes, each influenced by K agents at other nodes
– Social network and influence models; network & shared leadership
• Agent-‐based model – GeneKc algorithm; some agents can change their rules over Kme
For a more complete list of models, check out: -‐ Hazy, J.K., Millhiser, W.P., & Solow D. (2007). MathemaKcal and computaKonal models of leadership: Past and future. Complexity Systems Leadership Theory, eds. Hazy, J.K., Goldstein, J.A., & Lichtenstein, B., ISCE Publishing, Mansfield, MA, pp. 170-‐1. -‐ B. Lichtenstein. A matrix of complexity for leadership: Fourteen disciplines of complex systems leadership theory. Ibid, pp. 290-‐1.
One Complexity Model
Dal Forno, A. & Merlone, U. (2007). The emergence of effecKve leaders: An experimental and computaKonal approach. Complexity Systems Leadership Theory, Eds. Hazy, J.K., Goldstein, J.A., & Lichtenstein, B., ISCE Publishing, Mansfield, MA.
Group Pk
nk + 1 members
• The +1 is the leader • Only the followers produce output based on
effort, eik; effort was ‘ discreKonary’ • Only followers bear costs, cik • Total producKvity fk(e1k,…,enk) • Profit sharing αik by all, i.e., makes sense to
minimize number of groups because leader is ‘non-‐producKve’
One Complexity Model • Aptude change: • P is updated by followers to all leaders, and their own team
only • ProducKon fcn: • Defined an inequity variable • Leaders cannot see effort of followers • Followers can see effort of co-‐workers (same group followers)
Compared model against classroom experiment done by authors.
Dal Forno, A. & Merlone, U. (2007). The emergence of effecKve leaders: An experimental and computaKonal approach. Complexity Systems Leadership Theory, Eds. Hazy, J.K., Goldstein, J.A., & Lichtenstein, B., ISCE Publishing, Mansfield, MA.
Main ProposiKons
Prop 1: Leadership is NOT a role of the actors
Prop 2: Leadership refers to observable behaviours
Prop 3: (Leadership à Leader) in special cases only
Prop 4: Linear models don’t capture the relaKonship between dyads (and likely not in general)
Prop 5: We need models that are more than descripKve; they also explain
✓
✗
✓
✗
✗
Complexity: The Good & Bad
• Many different frui{ul approaches; good explanaKons • Understudied • Can accommodate hidden assumpKons • Natural framework for ‘levels of analysis.’ But emergence is overused and poorly understood
• Few models are grounded in data – largely about new descripKons
• Few models have pracKcal implicaKons (yet) • We don’t know what aspects are complex rather than complicated
Leadership & Followership
Everyone Does Both
A New PerspecKve
Leadership
Leadership
Followership
Followership
TheoreKcal ImplicaKons
• Third path: amenable to both tradiKonal and complexity views; explicit assumpKons
• Focus on interacKons; measure different outcomes, i.e., partnership results
• We can determine what is and isn’t leadership, followership or just good behaviour
• Clears up theoreKcal challenges; no more hammer & nail; recognizes mulKple roles
• Replace parent-‐child models with adult-‐adult interacKons
RecommendaKons
• More fish & animal modeling… volunteers welcome!
• Less staKsKcs, more mathemaKcs • Redefine leadership • Let’s have more followership • Let’s focus on partnerships
Leadership of the Birds & Bees
• Hive • Geese • Flocking and swarming
Leaderless State -‐ The Mosh Pit
Silverberg, J.L., Bierbaum, M., Sethna, J.P., Cohen, I. (2013). CollecKve moKon of moshers at heavy metal concerts. arXiv:1302.1886 [physics.soc-‐ph]..
The Basic EquaKons for MASHers
Silverberg, J.L., Bierbaum, M., Sethna, J.P., Cohen, I. (2013). CollecKve moKon of moshers at heavy metal concerts. arXiv:1302.1886 [physics.soc-‐ph]..
